EVE Forums

Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2012-02-18 09:42
  • First Forum Visit: 2013-11-21 06:27
  • Number of Posts: 13
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Aeon Boirelle

Security Status 5.0
  • The Scope Member since
  • Gallente Federation Faction

Last 20 Posts

  • Possible T3 BS concept in EVE Technology and Research Center

    James Baboli wrote:
    Omnathious Deninard wrote:
    Danika Princip wrote:
    Omnathious Deninard wrote:
    At some point they may be needed, for T3 cruisers to be balanced properly as a cruiser there will need to be ships capable of doing c5&c6 sites and that would most likely come as a T3 BS. Until then not now.

    Isn't that called a 'fleet'?

    They claim they need lots of EHP to handle the alpha from sleepers.

    You do need a small fleet to do unescalated c5/6 sites. as it is, t3 cruisers are best for that by a long shot because of their great mitigation, relatively high DPS and possibly insane EHP.

    If you reduce the application of c5/6 sleepers, you can then significantly lower the t3 EHP gained through the buffer subsystems without totally unbalancing wormholes or making t3s entirely useless, or making escalations ridiculously easy.

    actually you don't need a fleet to do unescalated c5 sites actually. All you really need is a well fit paladin.

  • Unscheduled Downtime Extension – July 15, 2015 in EVE Communication Center

    @ccp just ask James Baboli how to fix it. I heard he knows whats wrong. :)

  • Signups for DoW Issue Roundtables 3/1 17:00, 19:00, and 21:00 in Council of Stellar Management

    I would love to participate in either the town hall meeting or changing roles of the csm.

  • Aeon Boirelle CSM X in Council of Stellar Management

    Bellak Hark wrote:

    Thank you very much.

  • Aeon Boirelle CSM X in Council of Stellar Management


    Rosewalker yes I have submitted my paperwork to appear on the ballot.

    And yes you are correct that most incursion runners stay in small 1 man corps. I feel that maybe ccp could possibly invest in an Isk sink that would allow corporations to pay to be unwardeccable. But this mechanic would need lots of investigation to not be abused by major corps and alliances. for the mean time I am happy with the tools that ccp has provided to allow communities of non-Corp members to develop and be maintained.

    I am well aware of the strains that serving on the csm will put on me, and I am fully dedicated to investing the time needed to ensure that the voice of highsec is heard as loud as possible.

    If I could pick only one I would have to say Mike. He is a really swell guy who put a lot of time in trying to help highsec over the last couple years.

  • Aeon Boirelle CSM X in Council of Stellar Management


    For those of you who do not know who I am, I am a High/Null Sec residing incursion runner. I hope to represent High sec during this campaign and would like to address some of the issues plaguing High sec.

    Incursions are a wonderful way for Carebears to make money, while also being involved in a community. I do however believe that there are some design flaws with them in their current state. A quick list things that I believe should be adjusted are as follows:

    • Quicker monetary penalty for stacking the grid with extra players over the maximum payout amount
    • The ability to defend the Mothership before the Withdraw timer should be introduced
    • The TPPH site type needs a little work to bring it in line with the other Headquarter site types

    Freighter Ganking/Super Dunking

    Despite being a carebear I do not believe that this form of "content creation" as gankers would like to call it should be nerfed or removed. However I do believe that the freighter should be given at least some form of self defense. When was the last time you saw a trucker without a License to Carry. And to help combat Super Dunking, Freighters should at least be able to lock.

    This may lose me a few votes, but I believe that CCP was a little hasty in the way they tried to solve the issues that IS boxer was creating. And despite all the predictions in the forum post for it, I have yet to see a significant drop in plex price, or a better profit margin on industry. I have however noticed an decline in user online activity in the recent months, and a decrease in the value of deadspace modules which affects the income of High and Null alike. I believe that CCP should re-address this issue to come up with a solution that better addresses the problems at hand.

    As a candidate I would also like to state that I do not know everything about every aspect of High-Sec gameplay, however as a representative of highsec I will make it my duty to hear your voices and present your arguments to CCP in the best available fashion. The CSM should be FOR the people BY the people. The above touched on topics are not all of my opinions about the changes needed in the game, however they are the issues that I have the most experience with and first hand knowledge of. If there is anything you as a High-sec dweller would like to be addressed please mention it in the In-game channel "Aeon CSMX"

  • WTS 25m SP leadership / offgrid booster / command ship in EVE Marketplace


  • WTS 25m SP leadership / offgrid booster / command ship in EVE Marketplace

    9.5 Billion

  • Rep someone in limited engagement - get gun timer in EVE Communication Center

    I'm just saying that maybe if your gonna punish a logi with suspect status and gun timers, maybe they should actually be on the kill mail. Why only give them the risk but not the reward.

  • WTS 25m SP leadership / offgrid booster / command ship in EVE Marketplace

    8 billion

  • Incursions Start here. in EVE Gameplay Center

    Thank you Goldiiee for getting Helix added to the OP. I appreciate that. Also if anyone has any questions I'm happy to help answer as best I can.

  • Incursions : Revisiting Assaults . in EVE Gameplay Center

    PopplerRo wrote:
    Personally I like the idea of NCNs requiring specialisation of ship types and would actually like that to be the case for more sites, but for now as an easy, seemingly simple fix just remove 1-2 of the pockets to bring it in-line with the other assault sites.

    Thank you for reiterating what I had said earlier. I think this change would be more in line and extremely reasonable.

  • Incursions : Revisiting Assaults . in EVE Gameplay Center

    As an actual incursion fc that spends several hours a day running assaults, I would like to see these sights tweaked a little bit. The idea of removing the size restrictions is good, but more so I would like them to reduce the amount of rooms. Most of the time wasted by this site is from trying to balance the cruisers finish time with the amount of time it takes the bs side to move to their respective gate. If you made it so that each side only had the first room with 3 spawns then they both moved and met up in a second room for the 4th spawn, I believe it would Allow ccp to keep the uniqueness of the dual gates hut also slightly increase site times to make it more viable for most large communities to invest time in. But that is just my opinion. Sorry for any grammet or spelling issues. Sending from my phone.